Supporting Workers' Health and Safety via Workplace Design: Part 3
The final part of a three-part series exploring how businesses can support workers' health, safety, and well-being via the design of the workplace
Introduction
While it’s important to understand the theoretical underpinnings and effects of ‘modern ways of working’ (see Part 1) and environmental conditions (see Part 2) in the workplace, at the end of the day, the question remains: what’s the best way forward?
Acknowledging that no two workplaces are created equal, Part 3 of this series seeks to provide guidance on interventions to ensure workplaces can be designed to be as healthy as possible.
In this post:
It’s also important to acknowledge that the nature of a business has a significant influence on workplace design. Manufacturing workplaces will have different requirements from hospitality settings, which will, in turn, have different needs from offices.
Workplace design affects people differently according to their personal characteristics and the type of work they do… [so] a ‘one size fits all’ approach does not suffice.1
Avoiding this ‘one size fits all’ approach is an oft-repeated sentiment in research exploring workplace design. On the face of it, this seems like common sense yet, in reality businesses often fall into the trap of doing exactly that to achieve cost savings and/or speed up construction or alterations.
One problem with this approach is that those employees for whom the ‘one size’ does not fit are more likely to experience greater stress. This can result in a situation where those workers are pushed “toward the negative side of the burnout-engagement continuum”2.
Environmental Interventions
In Part 2, we explored the risks of harm associated with poor environmental conditions, such as noise/acoustics, temperature, lighting, layout, and supporting aspects of the environment.
As we discussed in that piece, to support workers’ health and well-being - as well as larger effects, such as productivity - employers need to ensure they are attending to the three elements of physical, functional, and psychological comfort in the workplace.
In this section:
Comfort
In many workplaces, efforts to address workers’ comfort have focused on ergonomic assessment and design. While such an approach is well-supported in research, employees’ comfort extends beyond workstation design (e.g., temperature, noise, lighting, furnishing etc.); this is also influenced by psychosocial considerations.
In terms of workstation design, key interventions are to ensure the following:
All mechanical elements (i.e., screens, desks, benches, and chairs) can be adjusted to suit individual workers’ needs.
This is especially important in environments where desk-sharing is used.
While evidence surrounding the use of sit-stand desks is mixed, some research suggests workers’ physical health and well-being can be supported via their use.
Staff have access to assessments by qualified personnel, such as occupational therapists, and are given training and resources on best practice in the set-up of workstations.
This should also be available for workers employed in hybrid and working-from-home arrangements.
Of course, many of us have jobs where we don’t sit at a desk. People working in other sectors, such as retail, hospitality, or manufacturing can be supported by providing:
underfoot mats
benches located at elbow-height
hand tools designed to reduce grip-force and improve posture; and
training and information on best practice in ergonomics, tailored to the environment and role(s).
Noise and acoustics
Those working in noisy environments and/or workplaces with poor acoustics are at increased risk of harm. This can present in a range of ways (e.g., reduced job satisfaction, increased workplace conflict, or decreased cognitive functioning) and can have a direct effect on businesses’ bottom line.
Several design features can be introduced to combat the effects of noise.
Give workers access to spaces or zones that facilitate quiet work.
This is important in workplaces using an open-plan design and is a fundamental feature of offices adopting an activity-based working (ABW) approach.
Particularly in ABW environments, these spaces need to be supported by protocols and guidance for when and how to use these zones.
Use acoustic treatments, such as sound-absorbent materials installed on floors, ceilings, screens, and dividers that separate noisy equipment from work areas.
This can be supported by workplace assessments undertaken by an acoustic engineer, who can provide specialist advice.
Where appropriate to the workplace, using partitions (e.g., between desks) has been shown to mitigate the effects of noise and distractions.
Be aware that some research suggests partitions can exacerbate noise-related issues, as workers cannot always identify the source of noise, leading to increased stress linked to higher levels of unpredictability.
Use less permanent fixtures, such as plants and screens to help reduce noise and distractions (while also supporting workers’ access to nature in the workplace).
Alongside these design features, research supports the use of ear plugs to reduce noise exposure. However, their effectiveness is strongly influenced by their proper use and the training provided to workers to ensure this.
Similarly, using noise-cancelling headphones (NCH) has become a common intervention to combat noise. However, NCH need to be used with caution as:
while qualitative findings support their use, this is not held up by empirical evidence; and
their use has been shown to stifle collaboration and engagement, making workers appear unapproachable.
Privacy
Losing visual and/or acoustic privacy is shown to have harmful outcomes for workers. Alongside the noise/acoustics-related interventions listed above, two main strategies are used to address privacy issues in the workplace:
Give workers access to spaces where they can hold private conversations.
It’s important to be aware this may introduce a new problem of using such a space “being ‘noted’ by others that you are taking yourself off to an office to speak to a co-worker or direct report”3.
Use partitions between workstations.
While these are useful for mitigating issues related to visual privacy, research suggests they are not effective for addressing auditory privacy.
Temperature
The temperature of a workplace can have a significantly negative effect on workers’ health and well-being. In Aotearoa, WorkSafe has gone so far as to suggest it can have a material effect on safety behaviours.
People working in uncomfortably hot or cold environments are more likely to behave unsafely because their ability to make decisions or perform manual tasks deteriorates.4
In terms of workplace design, employers need to consider glazing/window design and air conditioning systems. Research suggests the optimal temperature for workers is 20-24oC, with a relative humidity of 40-55%; businesses, then, need to ensure workplaces and systems are designed to deliver and maintain this.
To support workers’ thermal comfort and, by extension, their health and well-being, research highlights the importance of giving workers the ability to control the temperature in different work areas or zones.
Lighting
Workplace lighting is another element that can affect workers’ physical and mental health and well-being.
Aotearoa/New Zealand standards provide clear guidance for artificial lighting levels. Generally, lighting should provide a luminance level of 300-500lx. In addition, lighting levels in specific areas are as follows:
walkways and circulation spaces: 100-200lx
meeting rooms: 300lx; and
areas where detailed tasks such as proof-reading, process mapping, or reviewing plans are undertaken: 600lx.
Importantly, workers’ individual needs - including, as alluded to above, role-related needs - should be taken into account. This may require businesses to provide individual task-lighting.
[Lighting] should ensure a uniform distribution of light over the work area to help reduce visual fatigue and provide for the health and safety of all persons.5
Natural lighting is also a key consideration. Giving workers access to carefully designed natural lighting has been shown to have a range of health benefits. Facilitating natural light in the workplace can supplement artificial lighting, while also reducing a reliance on the same.
A final consideration is control. To further support workers’ health and well-being - alongside boosting their sense of autonomy and job satisfaction - it’s important employees can control lighting levels in work areas/zones, meeting rooms, and workstations (especially where role-demands require it).
Air quality
HVAC units used to provide an optimal temperature at work can also be used to provide appropriate ventilation. Poor air quality has been linked to poor mental health outcomes and, in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, has been highlighted in recent years as a key consideration.
In Aotearoa, MBIE recommends providing a ventilation rate of above 10 litres-per-second in offices, while acceptable solutions for New Zealand’s Building Code offers additional guidance that can be used in other workplace settings.
A final consideration is CO2 levels, as higher levels can increase the risk of exposure to airborne viruses. In offices and similar workplaces, a recommended safe level for CO2 is to keep these below 800 parts-per-million.
Access to nature
Giving workers access to nature at work has been proven to have a range of health benefits, while also improving work performance factors (e.g., increased productivity, innovation, and creativity).
Alongside strategies such as encouraging spending time outdoors, businesses can facilitate access to nature by:
giving workers views to nature - including windows that look directly outside and pictures/images of nature
providing plants/biophilia in the workplace (e.g., vertical gardens); and
where practicable, giving employees a dedicated outdoor area that includes green spaces and planting.
Other environmental elements
In addition to the various environmental factors discussed above, employers should also seek to:
provide resources (e.g., hand sanitizer) and embed protocols and processes (e.g., a requirement to clean desks and keyboards after use) to support workplace cleanliness and hygiene
consider the use of colour in workplace design (e.g., neutral and cool colours are often shown to support productivity and workers’ well-being); and
consider other comfort and aesthetic elements, such as furniture and furnishings.
Resourcing
An essential component of providing a workplace that supports workers’ health and well-being is focusing on resourcing. In this regard, it’s important businesses focus on different types.
In offices and similar work environments, one element that can be overlooked is ensuring staff have enough space to work from/in. Whether a worker has enough space has been linked to job satisfaction. A 2013 analysis noted that this effect was more significant on satisfaction than all other elements of environmental quality and comfort combined. In addition, commentators have noted the importance of this consideration for neurodivergent staff, some of whom may have specific personal space needs.
Similarly, while density is argued to facilitate collaboration and networking, the approach of increasing the number of people working in a physical space has been linked to negative physical and psychological outcomes for workers. The opposite approach - that is, decreasing the number of staff working in the same space - is argued to “be beneficial to employee mental wellbeing [sic]”6.
A linked consideration is providing enough of the right type of resources. Businesses employing desk-bound workers, for example, need to ensure they provide enough desks for those employees to work from. Similarly, staff may need to spend some of their time engaging in sensitive conversations or meeting with customers - they need meeting rooms that offer privacy and minimise noise.
In other words, employers should know enough about what their staff actually do so they can resource those roles appropriately (i.e., provide enough of a range of work areas/zones that support those tasks). Not doing so has been identified as a common pitfall of both adopting modern ways of working and workplace design more generally.
ABW environments typically feature a main area in an open-plan layout where most of the work settings are located, whereas around 50% of the time at the office is typically spent on tasks requiring concentration. As a consequence, a shortage of work settings suitable for high-complexity tasks is likely to be common across organizations [sic] adopting ABW environments.7
A third consideration is IT resourcing. Especially in the context of increased hybrid and remote working, employers need to provide their staff with IT resources that facilitate their work tasks, while supporting collaboration, developing relationships, communication, and flexible designs. Businesses that make use of ABW and hot desks, and larger organisations with open-plan designs should look to provide IT resources that:
facilitate workers’ ability to find each other (e.g., live digital directories)
allow for digital sign-in to buildings and work areas
allow workers to easily book rooms/spaces and resources
support communication, relationship building, and collaboration between remote workers; and
provide effective, intuitive, and fit-for-purpose audio-visual facilities.
Finally, to support workers’ well-being and help reduce the effects of fatigue and burnout, employers should consider providing resources that give “opportunities for stress recovery and mental recharge such as having quiet rooms on-site to rest in”8.
Layout
Note: this sub-section primarily concerns offices and similar ‘white collar’ spaces; other sectors (e.g., industrial, manufacturing, or hospitality) will have their own specific layout considerations.
Given its potential to significantly affect workers’ health and well-being, workplace layout is an additional element employers should pay careful attention to.
From a design perspective, workplace layout needs to be driven by thorough analysis.
Space allocations and spatial layouts…need to be carefully designed to reflect the range of organisational work processes.9
Research suggests a particular process to consider is communication and collaboration within and across staff and teams, with layout identified as a significant predictor of improved collaboration in the workplace.
Open-plan and ABW or ‘zone’-type workplaces should pursue a design that:
is adequately resourced to support workers’ personal and professional needs (e.g., enough meeting rooms or ‘break out’ spaces)
keeps quiet areas and individual workstations separate and away from collaboration zones and high-traffic areas
balances:
areas that facilitate work
spaces supporting social connections/interactions; and
building and strengthening of team and organisational identities
avoids placing quiet and semi-quiet zones in dark areas of the building
includes furniture and support resources that align with the intended purpose of an area or zone (e.g., not putting furniture that encourages conversation in quiet areas); and
ensures different work areas are visually dis-similar (so staff can interpret the intended use).
Employers can strengthen these strategies by:
ensuring there are clear protocols and guidelines in place for how different areas/zones are used
using signs and posters (alongside design features such as colour and furnishings) to clearly communicate the intended use of work areas; and
giving staff access to training and guidance that teaches them how to use and navigate the ABW or ‘zone’-based environment.
Design Strategies
While the interventions above address some of the specific elements of design, there are some more general strategies businesses need to implement to ensure they are giving their workers a safe and healthy workplace environment.
When businesses are looking to introduce a new design, provide a new workplace, or change an aspect of an existing workplace, it is essential they adhere to effective change management principles.
Engagement and participation
Researchers and commentators frequently highlight the importance of a robust, thorough approach to engagement and participation.
Studies exploring the introduction of ‘modern ways of working’ (e.g., ABW) highlight their importance, noting that employees’ overall job satisfaction and satisfaction with the environment is higher when these elements are emphasised as part of the change process. Staff involved in any changes related to workplace design need to have enough time to participate and have their say.
When it comes to designing new elements or changing existing ones, businesses and project leads need to take a ‘bottom up’ approach; all affected staff need to be given the opportunity to have an active role in planning, design, and decision-making. By ensuring this:
a more successful transition can be assured
the risk to workers’ health and/or well-being is minimised
businesses are demonstrating their commitment to providing a healthy work environment
employers are supporting a key determinant of job satisfaction; and
workers are given a resource that can act as a moderator for other stressors or demands.
The dual processes of employee participation and control “affect [workers’] perception and evaluation of their work environment…[which] also affect their view of themselves as workers and of their professional effectiveness”.10
Importantly, ensuring workers are actively involved and engaged with the workplace change ‘journey’ is a legislative requirement in Aotearoa. This includes involving Health and Safety Representatives and, where in place, Health and Safety Committees. Crucially, such legislative requirements emphasise active engagement (i.e., listening, considering, and responding) rather than only consultation (i.e., telling, instructing, or listening without responding).
Research supports businesses’ adherence to such practices, with various findings showing a direct benefit on/for:
general health and safety at work
workers’ performance and productivity; and
the level of success of implementation of any workplace design changes.
Finally, engagement and participation processes need to be supported by multi-directional communication that emphasises a cycle of engagement-feedback-change-evaluation. Such an approach “can be a positive game changer”11 for change processes.
The “extent and content of communication is considered critical for achieving positive outcomes of an organisational intervention”.12
Protocols
As we discussed in Part 1 of this series, some workplace designs - especially ABW or similar workplaces - require application of a set of rules or protocols for how to use different zones or areas.
To facilitate effective implementation, businesses need to work with staff to develop guidelines and set expectations for how and when workplace zones (e.g., quiet work areas vs collaborative spaces) should be used and, if appropriate, who can use them.
Protocols need to be crafted to account for the “tension between experience (the feeling and attitudes towards the environment), effectiveness (do the users achieve their goals), work productivity, and efficiency (how long does it take to get there and what does this cost)”.13
As with engagement more generally, such protocols must be developed via a ‘bottom up’ approach. If these are developed and imposed by managers/leaders without appropriate engagement, unless businesses take an authoritative, punishment approach, staff will ignore them.
Analysis
Change of any kind requires careful planning; a key component of such planning is analysis - this extends to workplace design.
Before embarking on the process of workplace (re)design, researchers suggest, employers need to invest in a significant amount of analysis. Such analysis involves working with affected employees (including those who are indirectly affected) to understand:
workers’ different needs and preferences
this needs to focus on professional (e.g., how often are meeting rooms used?) and personal (e.g., neurodivergent staff) requirements
role and task requirements (e.g., what do staff do and how often)
this should include considerations of “the time spent on high-complexity tasks”14
organisational/business characteristics (e.g., what are the cultural norms for how staff and teams work together?); and
the “number and strength of collaborative ties”15 between staff and teams.
Crucially, there are some traps businesses must avoid at all costs when embarking on a workplace (re)design:
Adopting a ‘one size fits all’ approach that ignores individual and group/team needs and preferences.
Ignoring the ‘human’ dimensions of workplace design.
Skipping the analysis phase and assuming they (i.e., employers and managers) know what their staff need and/or want.
Workplace design affects people differently according to their personal characteristics and the type of work they do... [and so] a ‘one size fits all’ approach does not suffice.16
Researchers have identified that where an employee’s needs and abilities do not align with workplace design, there is a higher degree of stress placed on them, acting as an additional demand. Conversely, when an office is well-designed, it can act as a resource by, for example, providing a more relaxing environment or facilitating cohesion among workers, resulting in greater productivity and improved overall well-being.
Leadership
Of course, workplace (re)design requires effective leadership, not just in the form of change management, but also with regards to people management more generally.
Some leaders/managers will find they need to change their approach from an autocratic style or one that favours micromanagement to one that emphasises support, care, and trust (i.e., manaakitanga). In open-plan offices, for example, supportive leadership is identified as a positive predictor of workers’ well-being.
A key skillset for those leading teams involved in workplace (re)design is emotional intelligence. Leaders should be able to recognise and understand how an individual is responding to a new/altered work environment and provide an appropriate level of support.
Leaders need to be able “to access employees’ emotions, understand where they come from, and extract the information held in them”17.
Those in leadership positions also need to act as effective role models for other staff. If, for example, an organisation has transitioned to an ABW model, managers need to lead by example, demonstrating adherence to protocols such as using the right ‘zones’ for the right type of work or booking collaboration spaces etc.
Similarly, especially in offices, managers/leaders should be subject to the same ‘rules’ as their employees. For example:
if all staff are required to shift to a hot-desking model of work, managers should not be allowed to retain a dedicated desk based on their title; or
where a business moves to an open-plan design, managers/leaders should not be allowed to retain a private office space.
You can access a summary of key recommendations for safe and healthy workplace design here.
All employees looking to (re)design a workplace need to keep in mind that successful implementation “depend[s] partly on improved ambient conditions… partly on aspects of communication and culture and partly on effective change management processes [sic]”18.
While there are several approaches to take and decisions to make during workplace (re)design, businesses and employers need to remember that the way a workplace is designed represents a significant physical and psychosocial hazard that must be managed to protect and promote workers’ health, safety, and well-being.
Bibliography
Alsarraj, H. A. (2019, July). Open-plan Office and its Impact on Interpersonal Relationships [Master’s Thesis]. Auckland, New Zealand: Auckland University of Technology.
aMaNi, H., Shojaei, S., & Zarei, H. (2020). Color and Its Impact on People in the Workplace: A Systematic Review Article. Journal of Ergonomics. https://doi.org/10.30699/jergon.8.1.8.
Appel-Meulenbroek, R., Voordt, T., Aussems, R., Arentze, T., & Le Blanc, P. (2020). Impact of Activity-based Workplaces on Burnout and Engagement Dimensions. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 22(4), 279-296. doi:10.1108/JCRE-09-2019-0041
Ayoko, O. B., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2020). The Physical Environment of Office Work: Future Open Plan Offices. Australian Journal of Management, 45(3), 488-506. doi:10.1177/0312896220921913
Babapour Chafi, M., Harder, M., & Danielsson, C. B. (2020). Workspace preferences and non-preferences in Activity-based Flexible Offices: Two Case Studies. Applied Ergonomics, 83, 102971.
Babapour, M. (2019). The Quest for the Room of Requirement: Why some Activity-based Flexible Offices Work While Others Do Not [Doctoral Thesis]. Gothenburg, Sweden: Chalmers University of Technology.
Bergefurt, L., Weijs-Perrée, M., Appel-Meulenbroek, R., & Arentze, T. (2022). The Physical Office Workplace as a Resource for Mental Health – A Systematic Scoping Review. Building and Environment, 207, 108505.
Bergsten, E. L., Wijk, K., & Hallman, D. M. (2022). Implementation of Activity-Based Workplaces (ABW)—The Importance of Participation in Process Activities. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(21), 14338.
Bernstein, E., & Turban, S. (2018). The Impact of the 'Open' Workspace on Human Collaboration. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 373(1753), 20170239.
Brunia, S., & Hartjes-Gosselink, A. (2009). Personalization in Non-territorial Offices: A Study of Human Need. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 11(3), 169-182.
Budie, B., Appel-Meulenbroek, R., Kemperman, A., & Weijs-Perree, M. (2019). Employee Satisfaction with the Physical Work Environment: The Importance of a Need-based Approach. International Journal of Strategic Property Management, 23(1), 36-49. doi:10.3846/ijspm.2019.6372
Candido, C., Chakraborty, P., & Tjondronegoro, D. (2019). The Rise of Office Design in High- performance, Open-plan Environments. Buildings, 9(4). doi:10.3390/buildings9040100
Candido, C., Marzban, S., Haddad, S., Mackey, M., & Loder, A. (2020). Designing Healthy Workspaces: Results from Australian Certified Open-plan Offices. Facilities, 39(5/6), 411-433. doi:10.1108/F-02-2020-0018
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021, June 2). Ventilation in Buildings. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/ventilation.html
Colenberg, S., Appel-Meulenbroek, R., Romero Herrera, N., & Keyson, D. (2021). Conceptualizing Social Well-being in Activity-based Offices. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 36(4), 327-343. doi:10.1108/JMP-09-2019-0529
Colenberg, S., Jylhӓ, T., & Akesteijn, M. (2021). The Relationship Between Interior Office Space and Employee Health and Well-being - A Literature Review. Building Research and Information, 49(3), 352-366. doi:10.1080/09613218.2019.1710098
Donley, J. (2021). The Impact of Work Environment on Job Satisfaction: Pre-COVID Research to Inform the Future. Nurse Leader, 19(6), 585-589.
Forooraghi, M., Cobaleda-Cordero, A., & Babapour Chafi, M. (2022). A Healthy Office and Healthy Employees: A Longitudinal Case Study with a Salutogenic Perspective in the Context of the Physical Office Environment. Building Research and Information, 50(1- 2), 134-151.
Frankó, L., Erdélyi, A., & Dúll, A. (2022). Transformation of the Office: Territorial Behaviour and Place Attachment in Shared Desk Design. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 25(3), 229-245.
Gauer, S., & Ilic, L. (2023). Leadership in Multi-space Offices: Realizing the Potential of Modern and Flexible Workplace Concepts. IntechOpen, doi: 10.5772/intechopen.106887
Gerlitz, A., & Hülsbeck, M. (2023). The Productivity Tax of New Office Concepts: A Comparative Review of Open-plan Offices, Activity-based Working, and Single-office Concepts. Management Review Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-022-00316-2
Gillespie, K. (2019, April 11). Open-plan, Hot-desking...The Fast-track to Poor Well-being and Performance. Retrieved from Global Leadership Wellbeing Survey: https://www.glwswellbeing.com/working/open-plan-hot-desking-the-fast-track-to- poor-wellbeing-performance/
Government Property Group. (2020, April). Principles for Office Design. Retrieved from: https://www.procurement.govt.nz/property/workplace-design-guidelines/principles-for-office-design/
Hancock, F. (2022, July 11). Whose Breath are You Breathing? Retrieved from https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/in-depth/470690/whose-breath-are-you-breathing
Harb, F., Hidalgo, M. P., & Martau, B. (2015). Lack of Exposure to Natural Light in the Workspace is Associated with Physiological, Sleep, and Depressive Symptoms. Chronobiology International, 32(3), 368-375. doi:10.3109/07420528.2014.982757
Hirst, A. (2011). Settlers, Vagrants, and Mutual Indifference: Unintended Consequences of Hot-desking. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 24(6), 455-473. doi:10.1108/09534811111175742
Hodzic, S., Kubicek, B., Uhlig, L., & Korunka, C. (2021). Activity-based Flexible Offices: Effects on Work-related Outcomes in a Longitudinal Study. Ergonomics, 64(4), 455-473. doi:10.1080/00140139.2020.1850882
Hoendervanger, J. G., Van Yperen, N. W., Mobach, M. P., & Albers, C. J. (2019). Perceived Fit in Activty-based Work Environments and its Impact on Satisfaction and Performance. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 65, 101339. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2019.101339
Honeywell. (2022). Workplace Air Quality: A Global Concern Emerges: Office Workers Share Attitudes and Perceptions About the Safety of Indoor Air. Atlanta: Honeywell Building Technologies. Retrieved from https://buildings.honeywell.com/content/dam/hbtbt/en/documents/downloads/HB T%202022%20Healthy%20Buildings%20Report_FNL%2002%2015%2022.pdf
James, O., Delfabbro, P., & King, D. L. (2021). A Comparison of Psychological and Work Outcomes in Open-plan and Cellular Office Designs: A Systematic Review. SAGE Open, 11(1), 1-13. doi:10.1177/2158244020988869
Kamarulzaman, N., Saleh, A. A., Hashim, S. Z., Hashim, H., & Abdul-Ghani, A. A. (2011). An Overview of the Influence of Physical Office Environments Towards Employees. Proceedia Engineering, 20, 262-268.
Kim, J., & de Dear, R. (2013). Workspace Satisfaction: The Privacy-communication Trade-off in Open-plan Offices. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 36, 18-26.
Kim, J., Candido, C., Thomas, L., & de Dear, R. (2017, July). Desk Ownership in the Workplace: The Effect of Non-territorial Working on Employee Workplace Satisfaction, Perceived Productivity, and Health. Building and Environment, 103(July), 203-214. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.04.015
La Brijn, D., Houtveen, S., & Schlangen, J. A. (2022, September). The role of cohesion and connection within the ABW framework: A critical elaboration. Paper presented at the 3rd Transdisciplinary Workplace Research Conference, Politecnico di Milano, Italy.
Langer, J. (2021, June). The Impact of the Physical Office Environment on Occupant Wellbeing. [Doctoral Thesis]. Cardiff, Wales: School of Psychology, Cardiff University.
Langer, J., Smith, A., & Taylour, J. (2019). Occupant Psychological Wellbeing and Environmental Satisfaction After an Open-plan Office Redesign. In R. Charles, & D. Golightly, Contemporary Ergonomics and Human Factors (pp. 223-233). Warwickshire, UK: Chartered Institute of Ergonomics & Human Factors.
Lindberg, P., & Vingård, E. (2012). Indicators of Healthy Work Environments - A Systematic Review. Work, 41(Supplement 1), 3032-3038.
Lovelock, K. (2019, April). Psychosocial Hazards in Work Environments and Effective Approaches for Managing Them. Wellington, New Zealand: WorkSafe New Zealand.
Mache, S., Servaty, R., & Harth, V. (2020). Flexible Work Arrangements in Open Workspaces and Relations to Occupational Stress, Need for Recovery, and Psychological Detachment from Work. Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, 15(1), 1- 11.
Marzban, S., Candido, C., Mackey, M., Engelen, L., Zhang, F., & Tjondronegoro, D. (2023). A review of research in activity-based working over the last ten years: Lessons for the post-COVID workplace. Journal of facilities management, 21(3), 313-333.
MBIE. (2021, September 13). Water and Ventilation System Safety in Reoccupied Buildings. Retrieved from Managing Your Building Warrant of Fitness: https://www.building.govt.nz/managing-buildings/managing-your-bwof/water- system-safety-in-reoccupied-buildings/
Morrison, R. L., & Macky, K. A. (2017, April). The Demands and Resources Arising from Shared Office Spaces. Applied Ergonomics, 60(April, 2017), 103-115. doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2016.11.007
Mueller, B. J., Liebl, A., & Martin, N. (2020). Is wearing active-noise-cancelling headphones in open space offices beneficial for cognitive performance and employee satisfaction? INTER-NOISE and NOISE-CON Congress and Conference Proceedings. 261, pp. 3002-3013. Seoul, Korea: Institute of Noise Control Engineering.
New Zealand Government. (2015, October 28). Health and Safety at Work Act. Wellington, New Zealand: New Zealand Government.
New Zealand Government. (2016, February 15). Health and Safety at Work (General Risk and Workplace Management) Regulations. Wellington, New Zealand: New Zealand Government.
Occupational Safety and Health Service. (1995). Guidelines for the Provision of Facilities and General Safety and Health in Commercial and Industrial Premises. Wellington, New Zealand: Department of Labour.
Othman, M. K., Rais, S. L., & Azir, K. M. (2020). Exploring Determinants of Healthy Workplace Elements in The Office Building. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 498(1), 012084.
Radun, J., Kontinen, V., Keränen, J., Tervahartiala, I.-K., & Hongisto, V. (2021). Benefits of Active Noise-cancelling Headphones in Offices. 13th ICBEN Congress on Noise as a Public Health Problem. Stockholm, Sweden: ICBEN. Retrieved from http://www.icben.org/2021/ICBEN%202021%20Papers/full_paper_33895.pdf
Rasouli Kahaki, Z., Jahangiri, H., Smith, A. P., & Kazemi, R. (2022). Subjective and objective survey of office lighting: effects on alertness, comfort, satisfaction, and safety. La Medicina del lavoro, 113(3), e2022024. https://doi.org/10.23749/mdl.v113i3.12371
Richardson, A., Potter, J., Paterson, M., Harding, T., Tyler-Merrick, G., Kirk, R., & ...McChesney, J. (2017, December). Office Design and Health: A Systematic Review. New Zealand Medical Journal, 130(1467).
Roskams, M. J., & Haynes, B. P. (2021). Testing the Relationship Between Objective Indoor Environment Quality and Subjective Experiences of Comfort. Building Research and Information, 49(4), 387-398. doi:10.1080/09613218.2020.1775065
Roskams, M., & Haynes, B. (2021a). Environmental Demands and Resources: A Framework for Understanding the Physical Environment for Work. Facilities, 39(9-10), 652-666.
Sadick, A., & Kamardeen, I. (2020). Enhancing employees’ performance and well-being with nature exposure embedded office workplace design. Journal of Building Engineering, 32, 101789, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101789.
Safe Work Australia. (2020, March 19). Principles of Good Work Design: A Work Health and Safety Handbook. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Safe Work Australia.
Samani, S. A. (2015). The Impact of Personal Control Over Office Workspace on Environmental Satisfaction and Performance. Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 1(3), 163-172.
Sander, L. (2017, April 12). The Research on Hot-desking and Activity-based Work isn't so Positive. Retrieved from The Conversation: https://theconversation.com/the- research-on-hot-desking-and-activity-based-working-isnt-so-positive-75612
Scrima, F., Mura, A. L., Nonnis, M., & Fornara, F. (2021). The relation between workplace attachment style, design satisfaction, privacy and exhaustion in office employees: A moderated mediation model. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 78, 101693.
Sever, M. (2019). Improving Ergonomic Conditions at Hospitality Industry. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478). https://doi.org/10.20525/IJRBS.V8I2.202.
Smith, C., Mirka, G., & Myers, K. (2000). Ergonomic Hand tool Interventions for the Furniture Manufacturing Industry. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 44, 5-102 - 5-99. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193120004402926.
Smollan, R. K., & Morrison, R. L. (2019). Office Design and Organizational Change: The Influence of Communication and Organizational Culture. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 32(4), 426-440. doi:10.1108/JOCM-03-2018-0076
Stacy, J. (2019, January 15). Psychological Impact of Hot Desking. Open Sourced Workplace. Retrieved from https://www.opensourcedworkplace.com/news/psychological-impact-of-hot-desking
Stohler, J. (2018, May). Flex-able Personalities: How Personality Moderates the Relationship Between Office Design and Employee Outcomes [Master’s Thesis]. Ithaca, NY, US: Cornell University.
Tokumura, T., Akiyama, Y., Takahashi, H., Kuwayama, K., Wada, K., Kuroki, T., ... & Tanabe, S. I. (2023). Impacts of implementing activity‐based working on environmental satisfaction and workplace productivity during renovation of research facilities. Japan Architectural Review, 6(1), e12345.
van der Voordt, T., & Jensen, P. A. (2021, November). The Impact of Healthy Workplaces on Employee Satisfaction, Productivity, and Costs. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, Ahead of Print. doi:10.1108/JCRE-03-2021-0012
van Duijnhoven, J., Aarts, M. P., Aries, M. B., Rosemann, A. L., & Kort, H. S. (2019). Systematic Review on the Interaction Between Office Light Conditions and Occupational Health: Elucidating Gaps and Methodological Issues. Indoor and Built Environment, 28(2), 152-174.
Veitch, J. A. (2011). Workplace Design Contributions to Mental Health and Well-being. Healthcare Papers, 11(Special Issue), 38-46.
Verbeek, J., Kateman, E., Morata, T., Dreschler, W., & Mischke, C. (2012). Interventions to prevent occupational noise-induced hearing loss.. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 10, CD006396 . https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006396.pub3.
Vischer, J. C. (2008). Towards an Environmental Psychology of Workspace: How People are Affected by Environments for Work. Architectural Science Review, 51(2), 97-108.
Williams, S. E., Ford, J. H., & Kensinger, E. A. (2022). The Power of Negative and Positive Episodic Memories. Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Neuroscience, 22(5), 869-903, doi: 10.3758/s13415-022-01013-z
Williamson, S., Pearce, A., Dickinson, H., Weeratunga, V., & Bucknall, F. (2021). Future of Work Literature Review: Emerging Trends and Issues. Canberra, AUS: Public Service Research Group, UNSW.
Worek, M., Venegas, B. C., & Thury, S. (2019). Mind Your Space! Desk Sharing Working Environments and Employee Commitment in Austria. European Journal of Business Science and Technology, 5(1), 83-97. doi:10.11118/ejobsat.v5i1.159
WorkSafe. (2016, March). Good Practice Guidelines: Worker Engagement, Participation and Representation. Wellington, New Zealand: WorkSafe New Zealand.
WorkSafe. (2017, June). WorkSafe Position on Worker Engagement, Participation, and Representation. Wellington, New Zealand: WorkSafe New Zealand.
WorkSafe. (2018, September 17). Noise: What's the problem? Retrieved from WorkSafe - Mahi Haumaru Aotearoa: https://www.worksafe.govt.nz/topic-and- industry/noise/noise-whats-the-problem/
WorkSafe. (2018, August). Workplace and Facilities Requirements. Wellington, New Zealand: WorkSafe New Zealand.
WorkSafe. (2019, February). Interpretive Guidelines: General Risk and Workplace Management. Wellington, New Zealand: WorkSafe New Zealand.
WorkSafe. (2019, July). Managing Thermal Comfort at Work. Wellington, New Zealand: WorkSafe New Zealand.
WorkSafe. (2022). Managing Noise Risks. Retrieved from WorkSafe - Mahi Haumaru Aotearoa: https://www.worksafe.govt.nz/topic-and-industry/noise/managing-noise- risks/
Wu, A., Roemer, E. C., Kent, K. B., Ballard, D. W., & Goetzel, R. Z. (2021). Organizational Best Practices Supporting Mental Health in the Workplace. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 63(12), e925-e931.
Richardson et al. (2017, p.46).
Appel-Meulenbrook et al. (2020, p.280).
Gillespie (2019, p.4).
WorkSafe (2019, p.8).
OSH Service (1995, p.14).
Langer (2021, p.56).
Hoendervanger et al. (2019, p.8).
Wu et al. (2021, p. e928).
Kim et al. (2017, p.23).
Vischer (2008, p.101).
Gauer & Illic (2023, p.6).
Babapour (2019, p.121).
Brunia & Hartjes-Gosselink (2009, pp.179-180).
Hoendervanger et al. (2019, p.9).
Ayoko & Ashkanasy (2020, p.499).
Richardson et al. (2017, p.46).
Gauer & Illic (2023, p.8).
Marzban et al. (2022, p.326).